LOA has multiple meanings. <div>See. <a href="http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/LOA">http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/LOA</a><br><div>However the author has defined it as Letter Of Authority (as per ARIN-prop-202).</div>
<div><br></div><div>Aaron Dudek</div><div><br><br>On Tuesday, April 1, 2014, David Huberman <<a href="mailto:David.Huberman@microsoft.com">David.Huberman@microsoft.com</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="14520478e4d43600__MailEndCompose"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Whether it’s no-op or op, please note that an LOA is actually a “Letter of Agency”. Maybe some networks now call it a Letter of Authority,
but it’s properly Agency.<u></u><u></u></span></a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">David R Huberman<u></u><u></u></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Microsoft Corporation<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Senior IT/OPS Program Manager (GFS)<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> <a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','arin-ppml-bounces@arin.net');" target="_blank">arin-ppml-bounces@arin.net</a> [mailto:<a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','arin-ppml-bounces@arin.net');" target="_blank">arin-ppml-bounces@arin.net</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Martin Hannigan<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, April 1, 2014 7:23 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Heather Schiller<br>
<b>Cc:</b> John Curran; <a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','arin-ppml@arin.net');" target="_blank">arin-ppml@arin.net</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [arin-ppml] 2600::/12 LOA<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p>It's a no op then. There's no need to mention LOA's at all. <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p><br>
On Tuesday, April 1, 2014, Heather Schiller <<a>heather.skanks@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
<div>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<p>The suggested text restricting LOA is: "ARIN will not issue a Letter of Authority (LOA) to route a research prefix unless the allocation is properly registered in whois."<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p>The text does not specifically restrict ARIN from issuing an LOA altogether, it requires that the resource be registered in whois. I think the text allows them to issue LOA for research where necessary and legitimate. It should not impede
them from issuing LOA in any other circumstance (though, outside of research, I don't imagine they get many requests for LOA) Can you foresee a circumstance where it would be appropriate for ARIN to issue an LOA for something *not* registered in whois?
Do you think the current text impedes them from issuing necessary and legitimate LOA's?<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p>--Heather<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<p>On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Martin Hannigan <<a>hannigan@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
<div>
<div>
<p style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Martin Hannigan <<a>hannigan@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 4:52 PM, John Curran <<a>jcurran@arin.net</a>> wrote:<br>
>> On Mar 31, 2014, at 3:11 PM, Martin Hannigan <<a>hannigan@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 5:00 AM, John Curran <<a>jcurran@arin.net</a>> wrote:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> NRPM 11 was designed for parties requesting allocations from ARIN for<br>
>>>> research purposes; not ARIN checking the quality/integrity of new block<br>
>>>> received from IANA. Given the recent occurance, I believe it is prudent<br>
>>>> for ARIN to utilize NRPM 11 going forward for purposes of this quality<br>
>>>> checking, as it makes visible the organization doing the testing/making<br>
>>>> use of the space, including duration of the activity and research nature,<br>
>>>> as well as reaffirming the expected uniqueness requirement.<br>
>>><br>
>>> If I understand this correctly, Matthew suggested that an update to<br>
>>> Section 11 would be more useful? If that's the case I agree. It would<br>
>>> require a few, simple, modifications.<br>
>><br>
>> I think his suggestion to make use of NRPM 11 for this purpose is quite<br>
>> excellent. It was not process that we used in the past, but shall be<br>
>> done that way going forward. To the extent that the community wishes<br>
>> to improve NRPM 11 policy text for this purpose of address space testing,<br>
>> that is also welcome.<br>
>><br>
>>> Why would ARIN ever need to issue an LOA if whatever is distributed is<br>
>>> in the registry? All the LOA responsibilities if even needed at that<br>
>>> point would fall to the registrant.<br>
>><br>
>> Agreed; that is the major benefit of taking an "NRPM 11" approach to address<br>
>> space testing - ARIN stays focused on being a registry and leaves the use of<br>
>> address space to registrants. Since registrants are unique for a given address<br>
>> block, we also preempt multiple parties with potentially conflict plans on the<br>
>> use (or routing) of any given portion of address space.<br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
> Yes, I agree. This is the preferable route.<br>
><br>
> Best,<br>
><br>
> -M<<br>
<br>
<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<p>To add to this, it appears that we can condense most of the hand<br>
waving down to a modification in Section 11.4 that adds to the end of<br>
the paragraph "All resource assignments will be registered in the ARIN<br>
WHOIS database and in a manner not conflicting with any other<br>
registrations". Or any other language that would accomplish the same<br>
thing.<br>
<br>
We ought not to specifically restrict ARIN from writing an LOA. There</p></blockquote></div></div></blockquote></div>
</div>
</blockquote></div></div>